Last weekend I read an article in one of the newspapers, the Daily Mail I think, by some tory supporting middle class, stuck up tart who was saying that we should be glad to have the immigrants here as they do the jobs the British wont do.
I hate the middle class Tory arseholes who come out with this crap. I wonder how much a year the tart who wrote article gets a year for writing such crap for the Daily Mail.
A lot more than the fucking minimum wage I bet. Hyprocritcal bitch. How would she like to live on the minimum wage - I bet she spends more on wine per year than most people who live on the minimum wage have to spend on themselves ;
The minimum wage is a legal right which covers almost all workers above compulsory school leaving age. There are different minimum wage rates for different groups of workers as follows:
The main rate for workers aged 22 and over increased on 1 October 2007 to £5.52 an hour from £5.35 an hour
The development rate for 18-21 year olds increased to £4.60 an hour from £4.45 an hour
The development rate for 16-17 year old increased to £3.40 an hour from £3.30 an hour
On 1 October 2007 the rate of the accommodation offset increased to £30.10 per week (£4.30 per day) from £29.05 per week (£4.15 per day)
With the average wage in Poland just £2 an hour, migrant workers are earning up to 10 times as much as they would at home, especially those who are skilled. A bricklayer who would earn roughly £3,000 a year in Poland can get over £30,000 in the UK.
The money made by Poles in the UK is being spent on houses in Poland and causing a boom in house prices - so theres not much of the money made by Poles being spent in the UK.
Poland has jumped to the top of the European house price growth league table after property values there soared 33% last year. Locals and foreign investors who were smart enough to buy property in Krakow, Poland’s ancient royal capital, are toasting a 58% rise. That makes the medieval city Europe’s top-performing location.
The average price of home in Poland is about £50,000 - and that means in two years a Polish plumber working in Britain can buy cash a home in Poland.
The reason why Poles and other immigrants live 30 to a house and work 100 hours a week on the minimum wage is because the money they earn here is being sent home not being spent here - in Poland its value increases by a factor of at least six the minute it leaves the UK. They are here to work, earn as much as possible in a short a time as possible and then retire.
A pole working for £5 an hour on the minimum wage in the UK is actually earning £30 an hour depending on fluctuations on the Zloty exchange rate. This is because the money they earn is not spent here - it is sent home so becomes the equivalent in Zlotys in Poland not the UK. There are 5 to 6 Zlotys to the pound. That means £1 equals 6 zlotys in Poland.
In reality the Polish plumber earns over £ 180,000 per year in relative terms just for doing the same job a British plumber earns the equivalent of £ 30,000 a year doing. This is because the polish plumbers money goes back to Poland where the UK pounds he earns is swopped for the equivalent Zloty - and then is being spent on buying homes causing as massive homes price boom.
http://www.trulia.com/property/1046313207-Single-Family-Home-Poland-ME-04274
In the Uk the price of a home is ;
Average Cost: £210,578
Detached: £323,332
Semi-detached: £189,617
Terraced: £168,134
Flat: £196,505
THE annual income needed to buy an average-price property in the Winchester area is now almost £85,000 and the waiting list for affordable housing in Eastleigh borough has more than tripled in five years.
No British citizen on the minimum wage can get a mortgage to buy a home for £200,000 a year.
Those Britons who are low skilled and low wage workers and who live on benefits and who are lucky enough to have a council house stay on benefits because it the only way they can afford to have a house. If they were forced to work they would be unable to buy a home and would spend most of their income of private rental costs for a home. With all the council houses going to immigrants then the lowest skilled people are consigned to perpetual poverty and homelessness.
The fact that the immigrants are taking jobs and homes from the lowest skilled people amongst us, means the poorest British people are being mde even poorer by immigration. Only the rich benefit and the corporations that own the media, the politicians and that work with the Judges. The poor get poorer whilst the rich get richer - and all the time the dumb fucking socialists and communists all campsign for more immigration and immgrants rights doing just as the capitalist elite want them too.
The report, South East Home Truths: The real cost of housing 2007 - 2012, says the cause of the worsening situation is lack of affordable homes.
It says one in every 18 families in the Winchester region is now on a waiting list for social housing. In over 20 per cent of areas, waiting lists have doubled in five years, and in some places the lists have tripled.
Eastleigh is picked out as a particularly dramatic example of the crisis, with the waiting list there up 239 per cent, compared to the south-east figure of around 50 per cent.
The waiting list is reckoned to have lengthened by 30 per cent in the Winchester area and 100 per cent in Test Valley.
The report includes Oxford Economics house price forecasts which predict drastically worsening affordability over the next five years.
In that time, prices across the region are expected to go up by a further 51per cent.
Lower house price inflation during 2008 is expected to bring house prices back in line with what is sustainable economically, and that is said to make a housing crash unlikely. But by 2012 the average home in the south-east is forecast to be nearly £400,000.
The reason why British people dont take jobs for £5 an hour is because if they do they cannot afford to buy a house, live, or have a family or have a life.
The fact that life on the minimum wage is a life of perpetual poverty and perpetual homelessness is because anyone living on the minimum wage cannot get a mortgage to buy a home.
Immigration cuts the wages of the poorest in our society, raises house and property prices, raises rental property prices and takes council housing.
We get fucked over on every level whilst middle class cunts like those in the Daily Mail, the Times and Torygraph tell us we should live in poverty whilst they get cheap nannies, plumbers and builders. Whilst the media maggots live on £80,000 plus per year for writing their drivel - we are forced to live in poverty whilst they lecture us on our failure to take jobs that ensure we live in poverty and remain homeless. Whilst the Independent and The Guardian run by left wing arseholes tell us to celebrate immigration and multi-culturalism - this is whilst the middle class bastards that work for those papers make an absolute fortune a year.
HOW MUCH LONGER WILL THE WORKING CLASS ALLOW HYPOCRITICAL MIDDLE CLASS CUNTS TO SPEAK FOR THEM, LIE TO THEM AND BETRAY THEM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
RISE UP MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS - YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT YOUR CHAINS AND THE SOCIALIST AND LIBERAL PARASITES THAT EXPLOIT YOU IN YOUR NAME.
The dumb fucking socialists, communists and liberals that support immigration are all mainly middle class, university educated, servile state lackeys doing OVER PAID fake jobs in the public sector race relations advisers and diversity specialists. They profit from the system as they support the right of the capitalist elite to exploit the working class, lower their wages and consign them to poverty by supporting immigration. The Left are now the Lackeys of the Capitalist Right - and Socialism has become the last stage in the final collapse of Capitalism as socialism supports Capitalism by supporting immigration that impoverishes the worker whilst enriching the bosses.
The reason why the Far Left attacks the BNP is because they are owned and controlled by the Capitalist elite that also attack the BNP in the newspapers owned by the capitalist elite. The Capitalist elite attacks the BNP every day, but promotes immigration at the same time as allowing the Far Left to attack the BNP in their papers.
The next time some trade unionist or some socialist tells you they support immigration - then spit in their face and call them a class traitor.
Heres one for Trevor Phillips to ponder from his Ivory Tower as he begins his 'inquiry' ( we all know what the verdict will be dont we ! ) into whether immigrants take council homes.
Polish proffesionals such as plumbers come to the UK and get a job on UK wages for £30,000 which in reality is the equivalent of them being on a £300,000 polish Zloty income.
They then send that money home to invest in Polish property which has had the effect of causing a massive rise in house prices in Poland - a 58 % rise last year alone in house prices.
This has then driven the poorest , low wage, low skilled Polish people out of the housing market in Poland. They cannot afford to buy houses anymore in Poland just like the poorest low wage, low skilled people in the UK cannot afford to buy homes in the UK anymore.
What then happens is that the low wage, low skilled poles then leave Poland and come to the UK.
Because they are homeless and destitute they then go straight to the top of the council housing lists for British homes based on their 'need' - and at the same time displace those British families who are dependent upon council homes and who have been waiting for council houses for years.
So the influx of Polish workers into the UK who send money home and raise Polish house prices is also driving the influx of Polish homeless people into the UK who cannot afford to buy Polish homes anymore - and ensuring British families cannot get council houses.
At the same time as homeless Poles take the British Council housing that should be for British families, the ones that work like the Polish plumbers also drive up UK rental prices and housing prices whilst they also drive down British wages and take British jobs.
We get fucked from all sides - whilst only the rich profit, both in Britain and Poland.
Immigration is nothing more than a process to create a new Middle Class in Poland and increase the size of the working class poor in Britain.
Now then lets see what Trevor Phillips reports from his 'inquiry' - and we all know that it will be that there is not problem regarding council housing - as the remit of his inquiry will be structured to ensure no problems relevant to the issue are included in the inquiry.
Saturday, 3 November 2007
New Labour - Old Mafia
Heres a great story about how the Labour Party is the New Mafia and how diversity equals criminality.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article2796395.ece
A Liberal Democrat activist had his £50,000 Range Rover set on fire during a bitter fight to oust a Labour councillor, an election court was told yesterday.
The activist, Iftikhar Ahmed, was a key supporter of Saeed Aehmed, who was defeated in the council elections in Birmingham in May when he stood against the Labour candidate Muhammad Afzal.
Mr Aehmed is challenging Mr Afzal’s victory and claims that he was the victim of a smear campaign, in which voters were told wrongly that he had been arrested for fraud.
Mr Afzal was also accused of trying to use family pressure to stop a witness giving evidence in court.
The heated election campaign included mudslinging from both sides. The Liberal Democrats produced a leaflet claiming Mr Afzal had been found guilty of general corruption in a vote-rigging scandal. In fact, Mr Afzal had been cleared on appeal. The election petition says that Mr Afzal’s supporters spread false rumours that Mr Aehmed had been arrested and was suspected of disability grant fraud.
Ayoub Khan, Mr Aehmed’s agent in the election, described a climate of fear in the largely Asian community. He claimed that some people were too scared of repercussions to complain.
He said that Mr Ahmed had been using the loudhailer in a Liberal Democrat campaign car on election day. Graham Brodie, barrister for the Liberal Democrats, asked Mr Khan: “Do you know of anybody, other than a supporter of the Labour Party, who might harbour a grievance against the owner?” Mr Khan replied: “Absolutely not.” Mr Khan said that Mr Ahmed’s Range Rover was destroyed by fire three weeks ago.
Mr Brodie: “To what extent are you aware of the reaction by Labour Party supporters to these proceedings and of people giving evidence to them?”
Mr Khan: “It’s a daunting task. Witnesses do not come forward. They are intimidated people. My relatives approached me about a week ago informing me I should not turn up to this hearing today. This is the sort of thing that happens: inner-city ward areas, close community ties and a lot of influence. It’s no surprise that Iftikhar Ahmed is not here in court.”
Mr Khan said that his own relatives urged him to stay away from the hearing after they were contacted by the Labour councillor. “Muhammad Afzal approached them in their business address and he had a meeting for about an hour and they subsequently called me on a mobile phone. They said: ‘Is there no way you could compromise and not go to court?’. I said ‘No’. It has caused a degree of tension between me and the relatives.”
Mr Millar, QC, for Mr Afzal, queried why the witness, a practising barrister, had failed to call in the police over this alleged interference with the administration of justice. “There are serious repercussions,” Mr Khan said.
The raised temperature on election day was described. A mobile phone recording was played of Mr Ahmed broadcasting by loudspeaker in the Liberal Democrat car that Mr Afzal was guilty of corruption. Labour had five cars with loudspeakers and were trailing the sole Liberal Democrat car broadcasting: “Lib Dems arrested, Lib Dems arrested.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article2796395.ece
A Liberal Democrat activist had his £50,000 Range Rover set on fire during a bitter fight to oust a Labour councillor, an election court was told yesterday.
The activist, Iftikhar Ahmed, was a key supporter of Saeed Aehmed, who was defeated in the council elections in Birmingham in May when he stood against the Labour candidate Muhammad Afzal.
Mr Aehmed is challenging Mr Afzal’s victory and claims that he was the victim of a smear campaign, in which voters were told wrongly that he had been arrested for fraud.
Mr Afzal was also accused of trying to use family pressure to stop a witness giving evidence in court.
The heated election campaign included mudslinging from both sides. The Liberal Democrats produced a leaflet claiming Mr Afzal had been found guilty of general corruption in a vote-rigging scandal. In fact, Mr Afzal had been cleared on appeal. The election petition says that Mr Afzal’s supporters spread false rumours that Mr Aehmed had been arrested and was suspected of disability grant fraud.
Ayoub Khan, Mr Aehmed’s agent in the election, described a climate of fear in the largely Asian community. He claimed that some people were too scared of repercussions to complain.
He said that Mr Ahmed had been using the loudhailer in a Liberal Democrat campaign car on election day. Graham Brodie, barrister for the Liberal Democrats, asked Mr Khan: “Do you know of anybody, other than a supporter of the Labour Party, who might harbour a grievance against the owner?” Mr Khan replied: “Absolutely not.” Mr Khan said that Mr Ahmed’s Range Rover was destroyed by fire three weeks ago.
Mr Brodie: “To what extent are you aware of the reaction by Labour Party supporters to these proceedings and of people giving evidence to them?”
Mr Khan: “It’s a daunting task. Witnesses do not come forward. They are intimidated people. My relatives approached me about a week ago informing me I should not turn up to this hearing today. This is the sort of thing that happens: inner-city ward areas, close community ties and a lot of influence. It’s no surprise that Iftikhar Ahmed is not here in court.”
Mr Khan said that his own relatives urged him to stay away from the hearing after they were contacted by the Labour councillor. “Muhammad Afzal approached them in their business address and he had a meeting for about an hour and they subsequently called me on a mobile phone. They said: ‘Is there no way you could compromise and not go to court?’. I said ‘No’. It has caused a degree of tension between me and the relatives.”
Mr Millar, QC, for Mr Afzal, queried why the witness, a practising barrister, had failed to call in the police over this alleged interference with the administration of justice. “There are serious repercussions,” Mr Khan said.
The raised temperature on election day was described. A mobile phone recording was played of Mr Ahmed broadcasting by loudspeaker in the Liberal Democrat car that Mr Afzal was guilty of corruption. Labour had five cars with loudspeakers and were trailing the sole Liberal Democrat car broadcasting: “Lib Dems arrested, Lib Dems arrested.”
VIVA ITALIA !
More on the expulsion of illegals from Italy here - the only bad news for us is that the criminal scum expelled from Italy and returned to Romania will probably now come straight to the UK and Cherie Blair, or some other lefty bastard, will represent them in their asylum claims at vast UK taxpayers expense - NOTE ALSO how the media maggot scum in the Torygraph and The Times will not accept any of the blame for the immigrant crime wave in the UK even they are the submissive bitches of the Capitalist elite who own their papers, who propagandise the Tories and who pay for the advertising in their papers and who demand cheap workers to undercut our wages and take our jobs so the fat cat bosses can grow rich and the working class live in poverty - the media, the politicians and the Judges are all to blame - and all must be dealt with when the time comes after we take power.
Note also how the media are trying to hide the fact the people being deported are Romanian gypsys not ethnic Romanians - ;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=MFDFF3CNC2HKNQFIQMGSFFWAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2007/11/02/witaly202.xml
Franco Frattini, the European commissioner for justice, freedom and security, said: "What has to be done is simple. Go into a nomad camp in Rome for example, and ask them: 'Can you tell me where you live?'
"If they say they do not know, take them and send them home to Romania. That is how the European directive works.
It is simple and safe. Romania cannot say they will not take them back, because it is an obligation that is part of being a member state of the EU."
He also urged Italy to pull down the camps to prevent any Romanians from returning.
However, the relevant European directive specifically states that expulsions should not be targeted at any ethic group, and that "the personal conduct of the individual concerned must represent a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society".
Previous criminal convictions are not grounds enough for deportation, it adds, and deportees must be given one month's notice.
( what about the fact they represent an ongoing criminal threat to the state - I think that should cover it - typical media bullshit even from the Torygraph - who gives them this info - bloody Searchlight or what ! )
Nello Rossi, the head of Italy's National Magistrates Association, said that each expulsion would have to be justified, and that "there cannot be mass indiscriminate expulsions".
( Why not - they arrive indiscriminately in mass numbers so they can be deported the same way - why should Italian tax payers pay for them to go through the civil appeals system - THATS THE RIGHT OF TAX PAYING ITALIAN CITIZENS NOT ILLEGALS - Yet again another bloody Communist Judge in the Italian state siding with the illegals over the legals - so much for Judges upholding the law !! )
He said: "The new law does not appear to conform to our own constitution or to the European law which recognises the right of European citizens to circulate freely and stay within the territory of any member state."
(How about the right of Italians to live in safety in their own country, to travel without fear of being killed and the constitutional right of the State to protect itself and the citizens first and the fact is that European Citizens have free movement in the EU - NOT BLOODY EUROPEAN CRIMINALS YOU MUG !!! - Another idiot judge )
The Italian home office said each Romanian would be brought before a justice of the peace to plead his case before being transported home on planes or buses.
The Romanian government said that it accepts that any violent offenders should be repatriated.
While waiting for transport, Romanians will be held in one of 13 detention centres.
Twenty Romanians were arrested in Rome, another 10 in Turin and handfuls from the rest of the country, while makeshift shacks were torn down. A team of Romanian police has arrived to assist.
The move has enormous public support. A survey on Sky television in Italy showed 83 per cent of people backed the deportations.
( Yet the 0000.1 % of the population that are Judges think they can defy the will of the majority - sack the Judges and replace them )
More than 550,000 Romanians, or 15 per cent of the immigrant population, have arrived in Italy since 2002.
Walter Veltroni, the Rome mayor, has claimed that 75 per cent of all crimes in the capital this year have been carried out by Romanians.
In contrast, petty crime in Romania has dropped by 26 per cent.
In the past 18 months Romanians have been responsible for 76 murders, more than 300 rapes and 2,000 robberies in Italy, according to police statistics. Nearly 400 Romanians have been charged with kidnappings, mostly involving prostitution, and 6,000 with receiving stolen goods.
Note also how the media are trying to hide the fact the people being deported are Romanian gypsys not ethnic Romanians - ;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=MFDFF3CNC2HKNQFIQMGSFFWAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2007/11/02/witaly202.xml
Franco Frattini, the European commissioner for justice, freedom and security, said: "What has to be done is simple. Go into a nomad camp in Rome for example, and ask them: 'Can you tell me where you live?'
"If they say they do not know, take them and send them home to Romania. That is how the European directive works.
It is simple and safe. Romania cannot say they will not take them back, because it is an obligation that is part of being a member state of the EU."
He also urged Italy to pull down the camps to prevent any Romanians from returning.
However, the relevant European directive specifically states that expulsions should not be targeted at any ethic group, and that "the personal conduct of the individual concerned must represent a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society".
Previous criminal convictions are not grounds enough for deportation, it adds, and deportees must be given one month's notice.
( what about the fact they represent an ongoing criminal threat to the state - I think that should cover it - typical media bullshit even from the Torygraph - who gives them this info - bloody Searchlight or what ! )
Nello Rossi, the head of Italy's National Magistrates Association, said that each expulsion would have to be justified, and that "there cannot be mass indiscriminate expulsions".
( Why not - they arrive indiscriminately in mass numbers so they can be deported the same way - why should Italian tax payers pay for them to go through the civil appeals system - THATS THE RIGHT OF TAX PAYING ITALIAN CITIZENS NOT ILLEGALS - Yet again another bloody Communist Judge in the Italian state siding with the illegals over the legals - so much for Judges upholding the law !! )
He said: "The new law does not appear to conform to our own constitution or to the European law which recognises the right of European citizens to circulate freely and stay within the territory of any member state."
(How about the right of Italians to live in safety in their own country, to travel without fear of being killed and the constitutional right of the State to protect itself and the citizens first and the fact is that European Citizens have free movement in the EU - NOT BLOODY EUROPEAN CRIMINALS YOU MUG !!! - Another idiot judge )
The Italian home office said each Romanian would be brought before a justice of the peace to plead his case before being transported home on planes or buses.
The Romanian government said that it accepts that any violent offenders should be repatriated.
While waiting for transport, Romanians will be held in one of 13 detention centres.
Twenty Romanians were arrested in Rome, another 10 in Turin and handfuls from the rest of the country, while makeshift shacks were torn down. A team of Romanian police has arrived to assist.
The move has enormous public support. A survey on Sky television in Italy showed 83 per cent of people backed the deportations.
( Yet the 0000.1 % of the population that are Judges think they can defy the will of the majority - sack the Judges and replace them )
More than 550,000 Romanians, or 15 per cent of the immigrant population, have arrived in Italy since 2002.
Walter Veltroni, the Rome mayor, has claimed that 75 per cent of all crimes in the capital this year have been carried out by Romanians.
In contrast, petty crime in Romania has dropped by 26 per cent.
In the past 18 months Romanians have been responsible for 76 murders, more than 300 rapes and 2,000 robberies in Italy, according to police statistics. Nearly 400 Romanians have been charged with kidnappings, mostly involving prostitution, and 6,000 with receiving stolen goods.
Friday, 2 November 2007
The Truth on Race Crimes in the UK
We have all seen in the media over recent days how statistics published by the Ministry of Justice 'prove' racism in the country is on the rise - this is true, but as usual the media have not clarified what the nature of that rise in racism is.
We have asked one of the countries top experts on statistical analysis to research the statistics published by the Ministry of Jutice and the results are published below.
Those who want a full copy of the report can ask me for a copy via the comments section and I will send it as a full PDF.
A copy of the report is also being sent to the Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Equality.
Excerpts are published here ;
A Preliminary Analysis of the Ministry of Justice Document:
'Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System - 2006'
Tony Shell
Summary of Findings
A preliminary analysis of official crime data shows:
Violence against the person is 5 times more prevalent in the
black community, than in the white community.
Drugs offences are 16 times more prevalent in the black
community, and 3 times more prevalent in the Asian community, than in the white community.
Robbery is over 9 times more prevalent in the black community, than in the white community.
Committing homicide is 6 times more prevalent in the black community, and twice as prevalent in the Asian community, than it is in the white community.
The homicidal killing of white people is 90 times more
prevalent in the black community, than the homicidal killing of black people in the white community.
The homicidal killing of white people is 30 times more prevalent in the Asian community, than the homicidal killing of Asian people in the white community.
The number of white victims of interracial homicide is approximately 40 times greater than expected, when compared to the number of such victims in the minority (BME)community.
The white community suffers more victims of interracial and racially motivated homicide than all of the minority (BME)communities put together – despite the BME communities being less than 10 per cent of the total population.
The number of white victims of racially motivated homicide is approximately 50 times greater than expected, when compared to the number of such victims in the minority (BME)community
This study has been prepared under the auspices of DarkLake Synectics* – an independent, non-political research organisation. This organisation has a particular interest in the development of social systems: of structures of complex social groups; emergent organisational behaviour (culture); co-evolutionary 'niche' development; cultural kinetics; social stability and of ethnic and cultural identity. The research concentrates on obtaining an understanding of the development and behaviours of highly complex social, economic and cultural groups.
* sin-ek'tiks, n. the study of processes leading to invention, with the end aim of solving practical problems, esp. by a synectics group, a miscellaneous group of people of imagination and ability but varied interests. [Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary]
Tony Shell/reports/crime-analysis-02
2
Tony Shell November 2007 DarkLake Synectics 10 page document
Contents
Contents 2
Summary Analysis 3
Criminal Susceptibility 3
Interracial and Racially Motivated Crime 3
The Analytical Model 5
Model Specification [Data] 5
Model Validation 6
Model Implementation 6
Data Sources 6
Use of Data (Selection Basis) 6
Statistical Significance 6
Nota Bene 6
Computational Results 7
Crime - General 7
Table 1 Prison Population for England and Wales, 2006 7
Interracial Homicide – Suspects and Victims 8
Table 2 Interracial Homicide – Suspects and Victims 8
Racially Motivated Homicide – Offenders and Victims 9
Table 3 Racially Motivated Homicide – Offenders and Victims 9
References 10
Tony Shell/reports/crime-analysis-02
3
Tony Shell November 2007 DarkLake Synectics 10 page document
Summary Analysis
It is important that these studies into criminal susceptibility and interracial/racist crime should be an on-going process. Therefore as new criminal data becomes available, then new calculations will be performed in order to both improve the accuracy of the analysis, and to detect long-term trends with regard to experiences of crime within, and between, different ethnic communities. This interim report is a part of that process.
This analysis is in two parts: firstly an examination of criminal susceptibility; and secondly an examination of interracial and racist crime. In each case the results of the modelling process are evaluated, together with comments on general trends and patterns of (criminal) behaviour.
Criminal Susceptibility
Both the criminal categories chosen (violence against the person, sexual offences, robbery, drugs offences, burglary) and the ethnic/racial groupings (white, black, Asian, other) are, of course, somewhat arbitrary.
However, the reasons for these choices are based on matters of practicability of study and of social relevance.
They provide the means for making important observations on the state of our communities, and for making insightful comment and effective recommendations with regard to social/political policy.
The most obvious observation to make is the consistency of the results with that of earlier analysis covering the period from 1999 to 2005 – see [1]. And as seen from previous analysis, the observed differences in observed criminal behaviour are very noticeable. These are not differences of a few percent but 'many-fold' differences in rates of offence. Examples are as follows:
1) violence against the person is 5 times more prevalent in the black community, than in the white
community;
2) drugs offences are 16 times more prevalent in the black community, and 3 times more prevalent in the
Asian community, than in the white community;
3) robbery is over 9 times more prevalent in the black community, than in the white community.
Again, we find there is also little evidence of any long-term trends in these figures, despite social and
demographic changes of this period under investigation.
Interracial and Racially Motivated Crime
This (second) part of the study focused on the most serious forms of criminal activity – of homicide. The reason for this is twofold:
(1) that this particular crime has the most profound effect on individuals and the community;
and
(2) that much of current legislation and much of statutory requirements and operational regulations for the law enforcement agencies have been formed as a result of perceptions regarding the nature of racist homicide (re. the murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993, and the Macpherson Inquiry Report of 1999 on 'institutional racism' within the police service).
Again we find it to be overwhelmingly the white community that suffers most from interracial and racially motivated homicide. More white people are killed by members of the ethnic minority community than vice versa .
This is despite there being approximately ten time more white people than there are people from the
minority (BME) communities. A total of 212 white people are recorded as victims of interracial homicide, as against a total of 144 victims in the BME communities. Similarly, a total of 14 white people are recorded as victims of racially motivated homicide, as against 9 victims in the BME communities.
On analysis we find:
1) committing homicide is 6 times more prevalent in the black community, and twice as prevalent in the Asian community, than it is in the white community;
2) the homicidal killing of white people is 90 times more prevalent in the black community, than is the homicidal killing of black people in the white community;
3) the homicidal killing of white people is 30 times more prevalent in the Asian community, than is the homicidal killing of Asian people in the white community;
4) the number of white victims of interracial homicide is approximately 40 times greater than expected,when compared to the number of such victims in the minority (BME) community.
A similar pattern of behaviour emerges when we analyse the criminal data relating to racially motivated homicide. On analysis we find:
Tony Shell/reports/crime-analysis-02
4 Tony Shell November 2007 DarkLake Synectics 10 page document
1) the white community suffers more victims of racially motivated homicide than all of the minority (BME) groups put together – despite the BME communities being less than 10 per cent of the total population;
2) the number of white victims of racist homicide is approximately 50 times greater than expected, when compared to the number of victims of racist homicide in the minority (BME) community.
Again, the most worrying aspect of this particular part of the analysis is that there are indications (based on comparisons of interracial and racially motivated homicide) that racially motivated murder of members of the white community are being significantly under-reported.
We have asked one of the countries top experts on statistical analysis to research the statistics published by the Ministry of Jutice and the results are published below.
Those who want a full copy of the report can ask me for a copy via the comments section and I will send it as a full PDF.
A copy of the report is also being sent to the Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Equality.
Excerpts are published here ;
A Preliminary Analysis of the Ministry of Justice Document:
'Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System - 2006'
Tony Shell
Summary of Findings
A preliminary analysis of official crime data shows:
Violence against the person is 5 times more prevalent in the
black community, than in the white community.
Drugs offences are 16 times more prevalent in the black
community, and 3 times more prevalent in the Asian community, than in the white community.
Robbery is over 9 times more prevalent in the black community, than in the white community.
Committing homicide is 6 times more prevalent in the black community, and twice as prevalent in the Asian community, than it is in the white community.
The homicidal killing of white people is 90 times more
prevalent in the black community, than the homicidal killing of black people in the white community.
The homicidal killing of white people is 30 times more prevalent in the Asian community, than the homicidal killing of Asian people in the white community.
The number of white victims of interracial homicide is approximately 40 times greater than expected, when compared to the number of such victims in the minority (BME)community.
The white community suffers more victims of interracial and racially motivated homicide than all of the minority (BME)communities put together – despite the BME communities being less than 10 per cent of the total population.
The number of white victims of racially motivated homicide is approximately 50 times greater than expected, when compared to the number of such victims in the minority (BME)community
This study has been prepared under the auspices of DarkLake Synectics* – an independent, non-political research organisation. This organisation has a particular interest in the development of social systems: of structures of complex social groups; emergent organisational behaviour (culture); co-evolutionary 'niche' development; cultural kinetics; social stability and of ethnic and cultural identity. The research concentrates on obtaining an understanding of the development and behaviours of highly complex social, economic and cultural groups.
* sin-ek'tiks, n. the study of processes leading to invention, with the end aim of solving practical problems, esp. by a synectics group, a miscellaneous group of people of imagination and ability but varied interests. [Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary]
Tony Shell/reports/crime-analysis-02
2
Tony Shell November 2007 DarkLake Synectics 10 page document
Contents
Contents 2
Summary Analysis 3
Criminal Susceptibility 3
Interracial and Racially Motivated Crime 3
The Analytical Model 5
Model Specification [Data] 5
Model Validation 6
Model Implementation 6
Data Sources 6
Use of Data (Selection Basis) 6
Statistical Significance 6
Nota Bene 6
Computational Results 7
Crime - General 7
Table 1 Prison Population for England and Wales, 2006 7
Interracial Homicide – Suspects and Victims 8
Table 2 Interracial Homicide – Suspects and Victims 8
Racially Motivated Homicide – Offenders and Victims 9
Table 3 Racially Motivated Homicide – Offenders and Victims 9
References 10
Tony Shell/reports/crime-analysis-02
3
Tony Shell November 2007 DarkLake Synectics 10 page document
Summary Analysis
It is important that these studies into criminal susceptibility and interracial/racist crime should be an on-going process. Therefore as new criminal data becomes available, then new calculations will be performed in order to both improve the accuracy of the analysis, and to detect long-term trends with regard to experiences of crime within, and between, different ethnic communities. This interim report is a part of that process.
This analysis is in two parts: firstly an examination of criminal susceptibility; and secondly an examination of interracial and racist crime. In each case the results of the modelling process are evaluated, together with comments on general trends and patterns of (criminal) behaviour.
Criminal Susceptibility
Both the criminal categories chosen (violence against the person, sexual offences, robbery, drugs offences, burglary) and the ethnic/racial groupings (white, black, Asian, other) are, of course, somewhat arbitrary.
However, the reasons for these choices are based on matters of practicability of study and of social relevance.
They provide the means for making important observations on the state of our communities, and for making insightful comment and effective recommendations with regard to social/political policy.
The most obvious observation to make is the consistency of the results with that of earlier analysis covering the period from 1999 to 2005 – see [1]. And as seen from previous analysis, the observed differences in observed criminal behaviour are very noticeable. These are not differences of a few percent but 'many-fold' differences in rates of offence. Examples are as follows:
1) violence against the person is 5 times more prevalent in the black community, than in the white
community;
2) drugs offences are 16 times more prevalent in the black community, and 3 times more prevalent in the
Asian community, than in the white community;
3) robbery is over 9 times more prevalent in the black community, than in the white community.
Again, we find there is also little evidence of any long-term trends in these figures, despite social and
demographic changes of this period under investigation.
Interracial and Racially Motivated Crime
This (second) part of the study focused on the most serious forms of criminal activity – of homicide. The reason for this is twofold:
(1) that this particular crime has the most profound effect on individuals and the community;
and
(2) that much of current legislation and much of statutory requirements and operational regulations for the law enforcement agencies have been formed as a result of perceptions regarding the nature of racist homicide (re. the murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993, and the Macpherson Inquiry Report of 1999 on 'institutional racism' within the police service).
Again we find it to be overwhelmingly the white community that suffers most from interracial and racially motivated homicide. More white people are killed by members of the ethnic minority community than vice versa .
This is despite there being approximately ten time more white people than there are people from the
minority (BME) communities. A total of 212 white people are recorded as victims of interracial homicide, as against a total of 144 victims in the BME communities. Similarly, a total of 14 white people are recorded as victims of racially motivated homicide, as against 9 victims in the BME communities.
On analysis we find:
1) committing homicide is 6 times more prevalent in the black community, and twice as prevalent in the Asian community, than it is in the white community;
2) the homicidal killing of white people is 90 times more prevalent in the black community, than is the homicidal killing of black people in the white community;
3) the homicidal killing of white people is 30 times more prevalent in the Asian community, than is the homicidal killing of Asian people in the white community;
4) the number of white victims of interracial homicide is approximately 40 times greater than expected,when compared to the number of such victims in the minority (BME) community.
A similar pattern of behaviour emerges when we analyse the criminal data relating to racially motivated homicide. On analysis we find:
Tony Shell/reports/crime-analysis-02
4 Tony Shell November 2007 DarkLake Synectics 10 page document
1) the white community suffers more victims of racially motivated homicide than all of the minority (BME) groups put together – despite the BME communities being less than 10 per cent of the total population;
2) the number of white victims of racist homicide is approximately 50 times greater than expected, when compared to the number of victims of racist homicide in the minority (BME) community.
Again, the most worrying aspect of this particular part of the analysis is that there are indications (based on comparisons of interracial and racially motivated homicide) that racially motivated murder of members of the white community are being significantly under-reported.
IAN BLAIR - RACIST BIGOT - must be sacked
Yet again that pathetic Liberal Fascist worm Ian Blair of the Met Police, who as head of the Met Police should have taken full corporate responsibility for the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes, is trying to squirm his way out of trouble as his political masters queue up to protect him.
Even that vile pustule on the face of British politics, Ken Livingstone, the admirer of Islamist Jew killers and republican terrorists, is defending the man he used to call one of the 'fascist pigs'.
This because all the real Liberal Fascist pigs in the police work for and support the Labour Party.
OINK , OINK BLAIR !
Ian Blair is a convicted racist - and yet he kept his job.
This was because the people he was , as head of the Met Police , racist towards were white officers.
Only under New Labour would a convicted racist, and now a person who as head of a corporate body is liable to be prosecuted for corporate manslaughter, be allowed to keep their job instead of being taken to court for murder.
Blair should be prosecuted for Corporate Manslaughter or Involuntary manslaughter by gross negligence.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section5/chapter_b.html
But he wont be - thats because their is one law for Liberal Fascist pigs that gorge from the trough of their Labour masters and one law for everyone else.
Say hello to the New Nazism - it wears the uniform of the State , murders innocent people and gets away with it.
As this excellent post on another blog states ;
Sir Ian Blair was found guilty, in July 2005, of racial discrimination against white Police Officers after his Force was found to have racially discriminated against three white Officers who were disciplined after falsely being alleged to have made racist remarks at a training day. The Employment Tribunal said Sir Ian Blair, barely five months into his post, had “hung his own Officers out to dry” and was also found guilty of “prejudicing internal disciplinary proceedings against the three CID Officers and of treating them unfavourably”.
Sir Ian Blair, who at the time of the allegations was Scotland Yard's Deputy Commissioner in charge of Diversity, was said to have trusted the word of an female Asian Officer, Detective Sergeant Shabnam Chaudhri, over that of the three white Officers, who were later absolutely and unconditionally cleared of any wrongdoing whatsoever by the force's most senior Asian Officer, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur.
Detective Constable Tom Hassell, 60, Acting Detective Inspector Paul Whatmore, 39, and Detective Sgt Colin Lockwood, 55, won their claim for racial discrimination against the Metropolitan Police. The Tribunal Panel, sitting in Stratford, East London, ruled in favour of all three Officers, saying they had been treated differently and prejudicially because of their white race. The hearing was told that Sir Ian's attempted intervention was made without his having investigated the case or even seeing the evidence used by the Police Investigations Board.
Tribunal Panel Chairman Ian Pritchard-Witts said: "We take the view that what this Deputy Commissioner (Sir Ian Blair) wanted was an example. We take the view, using his own words that white Officers were to be hung out to dry. He prejudiced the matter; why else ask for a judicial review of his own Officers' decisions. It points unerringly to unfavourable treatment."
Sir Ian has said that the finding of the Tribunal Panel that the Metropolitan Police was institutionally racist against indigenous white Officers was hurtful to the force, despite this clearly and demonstrably being the case. Rank and file Officers believe that he has betrayed their fellow Officers and now regard the Metropolitan Police as an anti-white racist Police Force operating to a New Labour political agenda.
Sir Ian described the remarks at the heart of the Employment Tribunal defeat as Islamophobic, stating: "That language was gratuitous, offensive and deliberate. Officers can expect to be disciplined for using language like that. I want this Force to have no place for racism". The fact that the Tribunal Panel found that the words claimed by Sir Ian Blair to have been used were not in fact used seems entirely to have escaped Sir Ian Blair.
Regrettably the Officers targeted by Sir Ian Blair did not sue him for libel and abuse of authority within the Police, as not only was the language they actually did use proved not to be racist, as defined in common law, but it is also a fact that Islam is a religion not a race, and therefore Sir Ian merely further damaged the reputations of the Officers themselves. The fact that Sir Ian Blair can still call those Officers “racist”, even after having been found guilty of racism himself by the Tribunal Panel, shows the arrogance, malice and utter incompetence of the man.
In an interview with The Guardian, Sir Ian Blair revealed that he intended to continue to racially cleanse the Police Force of white Officers for political reasons and make to make the Force less white, less male and more in line with the politics of the New Labour Party. Sir Ian Blair said the Metropolitan Police and British policing in general had no choice but to embrace diversity, because it somehow “delivered better protection to the public”, adding that: "Issues about understanding diversity, about respect for different communities, respect for different traditions in many occupations is broadly a moral case. For the Police Service and Metropolitan Police in particular, it is a fundamental, brutal business case. You can't police London without understanding the diverse communities we serve. How can you police the Chinese community, the Tamil community, emerging East European communities, North African communities, how can you do this without understanding and showing respect to the cultures of which this city is made up?”
The fact is that to Sir Ian Blair, racism also includes adopting proactive racist policies against whites, but such anti-white racism does not make up for historical racism against ethnic minorities and merely increases distrust of the Police themselves. The adoption of racist, sexist policies that seek to ethnically cleanse the Police Force of white, male Officers would be regarded as illegal and repugnant if the Officers to be expelled on the basis of their race were black or female. Therefore the adoption of racist policies against white Officers is a declaration that the Police no longer regard whites in the capital, and within the Force itself, as citizens with equal civil rights compared to ethnic minority Londoners. Therefore the Metropolitan Police is now a racist Police Force whose policing priorities are defined by how successful those racist policies are when measured against the ethnic cleansing of white Officers from the Police Force.
The paternalistic anti-white racist notion that the various communities in London are obsessed about how anti-racist the Metropolitan Police actually is demeans those who, from all ethnic groups within London, just want the Police simply to cut crime. The fact that Sir Ian has adopted the Neo-Marxist ideology and rhetoric of 'Identity Politics' shows that he has politicised the Police Force itself. If a senior white Police Officer had been found guilty of racially discriminating against black Officers and “hanging them out to dry”, then he would have been made to resign from the Police Force within 24 hours. The fact the journalistic placemen in the media lined up to defend Sir Ian Blair shows how corrupt the media itself has become, as it seeks to defend those such as him from being cast out of the power structures they have been put into to subvert from within.
For the sake of respect for the Police and so that white indigenous Londoners can have faith in the Metropolitan Police, Sir Ian Blair must resign. If he does not, then we will have no choice but to regard the Metropolitan Police as an institutionally racist body that has embarked upon an overt political and racist agenda against indigenous
Even that vile pustule on the face of British politics, Ken Livingstone, the admirer of Islamist Jew killers and republican terrorists, is defending the man he used to call one of the 'fascist pigs'.
This because all the real Liberal Fascist pigs in the police work for and support the Labour Party.
OINK , OINK BLAIR !
Ian Blair is a convicted racist - and yet he kept his job.
This was because the people he was , as head of the Met Police , racist towards were white officers.
Only under New Labour would a convicted racist, and now a person who as head of a corporate body is liable to be prosecuted for corporate manslaughter, be allowed to keep their job instead of being taken to court for murder.
Blair should be prosecuted for Corporate Manslaughter or Involuntary manslaughter by gross negligence.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section5/chapter_b.html
But he wont be - thats because their is one law for Liberal Fascist pigs that gorge from the trough of their Labour masters and one law for everyone else.
Say hello to the New Nazism - it wears the uniform of the State , murders innocent people and gets away with it.
As this excellent post on another blog states ;
Sir Ian Blair was found guilty, in July 2005, of racial discrimination against white Police Officers after his Force was found to have racially discriminated against three white Officers who were disciplined after falsely being alleged to have made racist remarks at a training day. The Employment Tribunal said Sir Ian Blair, barely five months into his post, had “hung his own Officers out to dry” and was also found guilty of “prejudicing internal disciplinary proceedings against the three CID Officers and of treating them unfavourably”.
Sir Ian Blair, who at the time of the allegations was Scotland Yard's Deputy Commissioner in charge of Diversity, was said to have trusted the word of an female Asian Officer, Detective Sergeant Shabnam Chaudhri, over that of the three white Officers, who were later absolutely and unconditionally cleared of any wrongdoing whatsoever by the force's most senior Asian Officer, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur.
Detective Constable Tom Hassell, 60, Acting Detective Inspector Paul Whatmore, 39, and Detective Sgt Colin Lockwood, 55, won their claim for racial discrimination against the Metropolitan Police. The Tribunal Panel, sitting in Stratford, East London, ruled in favour of all three Officers, saying they had been treated differently and prejudicially because of their white race. The hearing was told that Sir Ian's attempted intervention was made without his having investigated the case or even seeing the evidence used by the Police Investigations Board.
Tribunal Panel Chairman Ian Pritchard-Witts said: "We take the view that what this Deputy Commissioner (Sir Ian Blair) wanted was an example. We take the view, using his own words that white Officers were to be hung out to dry. He prejudiced the matter; why else ask for a judicial review of his own Officers' decisions. It points unerringly to unfavourable treatment."
Sir Ian has said that the finding of the Tribunal Panel that the Metropolitan Police was institutionally racist against indigenous white Officers was hurtful to the force, despite this clearly and demonstrably being the case. Rank and file Officers believe that he has betrayed their fellow Officers and now regard the Metropolitan Police as an anti-white racist Police Force operating to a New Labour political agenda.
Sir Ian described the remarks at the heart of the Employment Tribunal defeat as Islamophobic, stating: "That language was gratuitous, offensive and deliberate. Officers can expect to be disciplined for using language like that. I want this Force to have no place for racism". The fact that the Tribunal Panel found that the words claimed by Sir Ian Blair to have been used were not in fact used seems entirely to have escaped Sir Ian Blair.
Regrettably the Officers targeted by Sir Ian Blair did not sue him for libel and abuse of authority within the Police, as not only was the language they actually did use proved not to be racist, as defined in common law, but it is also a fact that Islam is a religion not a race, and therefore Sir Ian merely further damaged the reputations of the Officers themselves. The fact that Sir Ian Blair can still call those Officers “racist”, even after having been found guilty of racism himself by the Tribunal Panel, shows the arrogance, malice and utter incompetence of the man.
In an interview with The Guardian, Sir Ian Blair revealed that he intended to continue to racially cleanse the Police Force of white Officers for political reasons and make to make the Force less white, less male and more in line with the politics of the New Labour Party. Sir Ian Blair said the Metropolitan Police and British policing in general had no choice but to embrace diversity, because it somehow “delivered better protection to the public”, adding that: "Issues about understanding diversity, about respect for different communities, respect for different traditions in many occupations is broadly a moral case. For the Police Service and Metropolitan Police in particular, it is a fundamental, brutal business case. You can't police London without understanding the diverse communities we serve. How can you police the Chinese community, the Tamil community, emerging East European communities, North African communities, how can you do this without understanding and showing respect to the cultures of which this city is made up?”
The fact is that to Sir Ian Blair, racism also includes adopting proactive racist policies against whites, but such anti-white racism does not make up for historical racism against ethnic minorities and merely increases distrust of the Police themselves. The adoption of racist, sexist policies that seek to ethnically cleanse the Police Force of white, male Officers would be regarded as illegal and repugnant if the Officers to be expelled on the basis of their race were black or female. Therefore the adoption of racist policies against white Officers is a declaration that the Police no longer regard whites in the capital, and within the Force itself, as citizens with equal civil rights compared to ethnic minority Londoners. Therefore the Metropolitan Police is now a racist Police Force whose policing priorities are defined by how successful those racist policies are when measured against the ethnic cleansing of white Officers from the Police Force.
The paternalistic anti-white racist notion that the various communities in London are obsessed about how anti-racist the Metropolitan Police actually is demeans those who, from all ethnic groups within London, just want the Police simply to cut crime. The fact that Sir Ian has adopted the Neo-Marxist ideology and rhetoric of 'Identity Politics' shows that he has politicised the Police Force itself. If a senior white Police Officer had been found guilty of racially discriminating against black Officers and “hanging them out to dry”, then he would have been made to resign from the Police Force within 24 hours. The fact the journalistic placemen in the media lined up to defend Sir Ian Blair shows how corrupt the media itself has become, as it seeks to defend those such as him from being cast out of the power structures they have been put into to subvert from within.
For the sake of respect for the Police and so that white indigenous Londoners can have faith in the Metropolitan Police, Sir Ian Blair must resign. If he does not, then we will have no choice but to regard the Metropolitan Police as an institutionally racist body that has embarked upon an overt political and racist agenda against indigenous
Ban Christmas - says Labour Party Lickspittle
Who remembers that great scene in Robin Hood Prince of Thieves where Alan Rickman as the Sherrif of Nottingham rampages through his castle screaming at one of his underlings to ' cancel christmas '.
Now another robbing bunch of bastards similar to the Sherrif Of Nottingham and his cabal of arse lickers, the Labour Party led by Gordon Brown, are also planning to ban christmas.
Ben Rogers and Rick Muir of the Institute for Public Policy Research have written a secret report for their boss, Nick Pearce, now head of public policy at Downing Street. Details of the report are listed below.
You can just imagine what this clique of wankers in the IPPR, the Labour Party and the leftist groups working with the IPRR are like.
A cabal of dwarfish sexual inadequates in nice shiny Aramni suits, with lovely silk pink ties, baby blue silk shirts and pink thongs and stockings and suspenders under their suits. They all strut around the office making 'important plans' for the country then go home , stuff an orange saturated with Amyl Nitrate in their mouthes, and spank their shrinkled little winkles to visions of their own power and importance.
ARSEHOLES.
You know the type - the New Labour version of the weirdos in the song by Blur 'Mr.Robinsons Quango '
" He ran into the toilet in the town hall
Got a biro out and he wrote on the wall
I'm wearing black french knickers on under my suit
I'm wearing stockings and suspenders oh I'm feeling rather loose "
Along with banning Christmas this cabal of idiots also wants us to fly other flags from Town Halls - perhaps the Polish one would be the correct one to use now that half of Poland is now living in the UK.
Though we all know there are two flags they all really want to fly alongside each other in this country dont we ;
The Flag of Islam and the Communist Hammer and Sickle.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=490925&in_page_id=1770
Christmas should be downgraded in favour of festivals from other religions to improve race relations, says an explosive report.
Labour's favourite think-tank says that because it would be hard to "expunge" Christmas from the national calendar, 'even-handedness' means public organisations must start giving other religions equal footing.
The leaked findings of its investigation into identity, citizenship and community cohesion also propose:
• "Birth ceremonies", at which state and parents agree to "work in partnership" to bring up children
• Action to "ensure access" for ethnic minorities to "largely white" countryside
• An overhaul of Britain's "imperial" honours system
• Bishops being thrown out of the House of Lords
• An end to "sectarian" religious education
• Flying flags other than the Union Jack.
The report by the Institute for Public Policy Research was commissioned when Nick Pearce, now head of public policy at Downing Street, was its director.
IPPR has shaped many Labour policies, including ID cards, bin taxes and road pricing.
The report robustly defends multiculturalism - the idea that different communities should not be forced to integrate but should be allowed to maintain their own culture and identities.
And it says immigrants should be required to acquire some proficiency in English and other aspects of British culture "if - but only if - the settled population is willing to open up national institutions and practices to newcomers and give a more inclusive cast to national narratives and symbols".
It adds: "Even-handedness dictates that we provide public recognition to minority cultures and traditions.
"If we are going to continue as a nation to mark Christmas - and it would be very hard to expunge it from our national life even if we wanted to - then public organisations should mark other religious festivals too.
"We can no longer define ourselves as a Christian nation, nor an especially religious one in any sense.
"The empire is gone, church attendance is at historically low levels, and the Second World War is inexorably slipping from memory."
The report, written by IPPR advisers Ben Rogers and Rick Muir, calls on Ministers to launch an "urgent and upfront campaign" promoting a "multicultural understanding of Britishness".
Now another robbing bunch of bastards similar to the Sherrif Of Nottingham and his cabal of arse lickers, the Labour Party led by Gordon Brown, are also planning to ban christmas.
Ben Rogers and Rick Muir of the Institute for Public Policy Research have written a secret report for their boss, Nick Pearce, now head of public policy at Downing Street. Details of the report are listed below.
You can just imagine what this clique of wankers in the IPPR, the Labour Party and the leftist groups working with the IPRR are like.
A cabal of dwarfish sexual inadequates in nice shiny Aramni suits, with lovely silk pink ties, baby blue silk shirts and pink thongs and stockings and suspenders under their suits. They all strut around the office making 'important plans' for the country then go home , stuff an orange saturated with Amyl Nitrate in their mouthes, and spank their shrinkled little winkles to visions of their own power and importance.
ARSEHOLES.
You know the type - the New Labour version of the weirdos in the song by Blur 'Mr.Robinsons Quango '
" He ran into the toilet in the town hall
Got a biro out and he wrote on the wall
I'm wearing black french knickers on under my suit
I'm wearing stockings and suspenders oh I'm feeling rather loose "
Along with banning Christmas this cabal of idiots also wants us to fly other flags from Town Halls - perhaps the Polish one would be the correct one to use now that half of Poland is now living in the UK.
Though we all know there are two flags they all really want to fly alongside each other in this country dont we ;
The Flag of Islam and the Communist Hammer and Sickle.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=490925&in_page_id=1770
Christmas should be downgraded in favour of festivals from other religions to improve race relations, says an explosive report.
Labour's favourite think-tank says that because it would be hard to "expunge" Christmas from the national calendar, 'even-handedness' means public organisations must start giving other religions equal footing.
The leaked findings of its investigation into identity, citizenship and community cohesion also propose:
• "Birth ceremonies", at which state and parents agree to "work in partnership" to bring up children
• Action to "ensure access" for ethnic minorities to "largely white" countryside
• An overhaul of Britain's "imperial" honours system
• Bishops being thrown out of the House of Lords
• An end to "sectarian" religious education
• Flying flags other than the Union Jack.
The report by the Institute for Public Policy Research was commissioned when Nick Pearce, now head of public policy at Downing Street, was its director.
IPPR has shaped many Labour policies, including ID cards, bin taxes and road pricing.
The report robustly defends multiculturalism - the idea that different communities should not be forced to integrate but should be allowed to maintain their own culture and identities.
And it says immigrants should be required to acquire some proficiency in English and other aspects of British culture "if - but only if - the settled population is willing to open up national institutions and practices to newcomers and give a more inclusive cast to national narratives and symbols".
It adds: "Even-handedness dictates that we provide public recognition to minority cultures and traditions.
"If we are going to continue as a nation to mark Christmas - and it would be very hard to expunge it from our national life even if we wanted to - then public organisations should mark other religious festivals too.
"We can no longer define ourselves as a Christian nation, nor an especially religious one in any sense.
"The empire is gone, church attendance is at historically low levels, and the Second World War is inexorably slipping from memory."
The report, written by IPPR advisers Ben Rogers and Rick Muir, calls on Ministers to launch an "urgent and upfront campaign" promoting a "multicultural understanding of Britishness".
The Big Lie Exposed - we can deport foreign criminals
How often is that we read in the papers that the Labour government via some pompous liberal Judge, usually married to a Labour minister or a member of the Labour Party, has refused to deport a foreign criminal from Britain as they say the laws of the European Union, the Human Rights Act and the ECHR all forbid the removal of immigrant criminals.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=490931&in_page_id=1770
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2300188.ece
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/opinion-former-index/policing-and-crime/chindamo-deportation-barred-under-eu-law-$477468.htm
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/opinion-former-index/policing-and-crime/govt-blames-interpretation-human-rights-ruling-$477420.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=471370&in_page_id=1770
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2727025.ece
This has now been proved to be a total lie.
We can send criminals like Learco Chindamo back to where they came from under EU law any time we want just by passing a single law to do so. The Italians passed such a law in one night yesterday - it is just that in Britain the Labour government, the liberal media and the Liberal Judges all dont want the British people to realise that they have the power to deport immigrant criminals like Chindamo.
In The Guardian newspaper on Friday November 2, 2007 the truth has finally been revealed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/italy/story/0,,2203953,00.html
Last night the Italian president, Giorgio Napolitano, signed through a decree put together in an emergency session of Romano Prodi's centre-left cabinet that will allow prefects - the local representatives of the interior ministry - to expel summarily the citizens of other EU states if they are judged a threat to public security.
The prologue to the new measure makes it clear it is aimed at Romanians. Officials in Brussels said the Italian government appeared to be within the terms of a European directive that allows member states to expel citizens of other EU countries if they are a threat to public health, public security, or have insufficient means.
Now we in Britain all need to work together to get the BNP voted into power so that the BNP can pass a similar law to remove every single illegal immigrant, bogus asylum seeker, inactive economic migrant and foreign criminal that is present unlawfully on our shores.
The BNP will also include in the new law the final provision of the European Directive to ensure that all economically inactive economic migrants can be removed. The law allows the removal of anti-social illegal entrants to our country to happen, but a political party needs to be elected with the will to impose this law in order for it to begin.
That party is the BNP. Either join us or support us, or watch as we lose our country forever and our society is destroyed by the thousands of criminals and killers allowed to live in our country by the gutless establishment politicians who are too scared of being called 'racist' to act to save us and our country.
Italian woman's murder prompts expulsion threat to Romanians ·
EU citizens judged to be security risk face removal·
24-year-old Gypsy held over fatal beating John Hooper in Rome
Friday November 2, 2007
The Guardian
Italian police arrive at the shantytown in Rome where the suspect lived with his mother. Giovanna Reggiani walked out of a suburban railway station into a horror story. She had been shopping in central Rome. On the lonely road that leads from the Tor di Quinto station, she fell into the hands of a frenzied attacker. She was robbed, sexually assaulted and then beaten with what a police spokesman called "unparalleled ferocity".
What befell the 47-year-old wife of a naval captain on Tuesday night not only left her unconscious and dying. It also changed the law of her country and sparked a continuing anti-foreigner outcry unmatched in Italy's recent history.
The man accused of murdering Ms Reggiani was one among hundreds of thousands of Romanians who have poured into Italy since 2002 after visa restrictions were lifted in anticipation of their country's entry this year into the European Union.
Last night the Italian president, Giorgio Napolitano, signed through a decree put together in an emergency session of Romano Prodi's centre-left cabinet that will allow prefects - the local representatives of the interior ministry - to expel summarily the citizens of other EU states if they are judged a threat to public security. The prologue to the new measure makes it clear it is aimed at Romanians.
"In the last few years the proportion of crime committed by foreigners has increased, and those who commit most crime are the Romanians," it says.
Unlike Britain, Italy did not seek a moratorium on immigration from Romania and the other poor new entrant state, Bulgaria. But the rapid growth in what is now Italy's biggest immigrant community has been accompanied by a string of vicious crimes.
In May an elderly couple were hacked to death, allegedly by the husband of their Romanian carer. The Roman Catholic charity Caritas puts the number of Romanians in Italy at 556,000 - less than 1% of the population. Yet, according to the interior minister, 5.6% of those arrested for murder are Romanian.
The government's move came amid mounting public alarm, growing media ferment and pressure, not just from Silvio Berlusconi's rightwing opposition, but also from within the governing majority. Foremost among those demanding action was Rome's mayor, Walter Veltroni, who last month became Mr Prodi's heir-apparent when he was chosen to lead a new united centre-left movement. Earlier this year Mr Veltroni flew to Romania to press the authorities to stem the flow of migrants, particularly Roma.
At a press conference on Wednesday widely credited with forcing the cabinet to act, he said: "Before Romania's entry into the EU Rome was the safest of cities." He added: "We need to start over with repatriations." Officials in Brussels said the Italian government appeared to be within the terms of a European directive that allows member states to expel citizens of other EU countries if they are a threat to public health, public security, or have insufficient means.
To the annoyance of the Italian right, the decree does not include the final provision. Franco Frattini, the commission vice-president for Justice, Freedom and Security, said last night: "The countries of the European Union must be lands of welcome, especially for citizens of other EU states. But we have to be tough on those who commit offences.
"Italy must not become a safe haven for criminals, a place where the rule of law is not respected."
Unlike Britain - where the liberals and leftists and the gutless media and useless Judges all conpsire to turn our country into a cage where the scum of Europe and the animals of the World come to live and that we pay for.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=490931&in_page_id=1770
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2300188.ece
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/opinion-former-index/policing-and-crime/chindamo-deportation-barred-under-eu-law-$477468.htm
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/opinion-former-index/policing-and-crime/govt-blames-interpretation-human-rights-ruling-$477420.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=471370&in_page_id=1770
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2727025.ece
This has now been proved to be a total lie.
We can send criminals like Learco Chindamo back to where they came from under EU law any time we want just by passing a single law to do so. The Italians passed such a law in one night yesterday - it is just that in Britain the Labour government, the liberal media and the Liberal Judges all dont want the British people to realise that they have the power to deport immigrant criminals like Chindamo.
In The Guardian newspaper on Friday November 2, 2007 the truth has finally been revealed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/italy/story/0,,2203953,00.html
Last night the Italian president, Giorgio Napolitano, signed through a decree put together in an emergency session of Romano Prodi's centre-left cabinet that will allow prefects - the local representatives of the interior ministry - to expel summarily the citizens of other EU states if they are judged a threat to public security.
The prologue to the new measure makes it clear it is aimed at Romanians. Officials in Brussels said the Italian government appeared to be within the terms of a European directive that allows member states to expel citizens of other EU countries if they are a threat to public health, public security, or have insufficient means.
Now we in Britain all need to work together to get the BNP voted into power so that the BNP can pass a similar law to remove every single illegal immigrant, bogus asylum seeker, inactive economic migrant and foreign criminal that is present unlawfully on our shores.
The BNP will also include in the new law the final provision of the European Directive to ensure that all economically inactive economic migrants can be removed. The law allows the removal of anti-social illegal entrants to our country to happen, but a political party needs to be elected with the will to impose this law in order for it to begin.
That party is the BNP. Either join us or support us, or watch as we lose our country forever and our society is destroyed by the thousands of criminals and killers allowed to live in our country by the gutless establishment politicians who are too scared of being called 'racist' to act to save us and our country.
Italian woman's murder prompts expulsion threat to Romanians ·
EU citizens judged to be security risk face removal·
24-year-old Gypsy held over fatal beating John Hooper in Rome
Friday November 2, 2007
The Guardian
Italian police arrive at the shantytown in Rome where the suspect lived with his mother. Giovanna Reggiani walked out of a suburban railway station into a horror story. She had been shopping in central Rome. On the lonely road that leads from the Tor di Quinto station, she fell into the hands of a frenzied attacker. She was robbed, sexually assaulted and then beaten with what a police spokesman called "unparalleled ferocity".
What befell the 47-year-old wife of a naval captain on Tuesday night not only left her unconscious and dying. It also changed the law of her country and sparked a continuing anti-foreigner outcry unmatched in Italy's recent history.
The man accused of murdering Ms Reggiani was one among hundreds of thousands of Romanians who have poured into Italy since 2002 after visa restrictions were lifted in anticipation of their country's entry this year into the European Union.
Last night the Italian president, Giorgio Napolitano, signed through a decree put together in an emergency session of Romano Prodi's centre-left cabinet that will allow prefects - the local representatives of the interior ministry - to expel summarily the citizens of other EU states if they are judged a threat to public security. The prologue to the new measure makes it clear it is aimed at Romanians.
"In the last few years the proportion of crime committed by foreigners has increased, and those who commit most crime are the Romanians," it says.
Unlike Britain, Italy did not seek a moratorium on immigration from Romania and the other poor new entrant state, Bulgaria. But the rapid growth in what is now Italy's biggest immigrant community has been accompanied by a string of vicious crimes.
In May an elderly couple were hacked to death, allegedly by the husband of their Romanian carer. The Roman Catholic charity Caritas puts the number of Romanians in Italy at 556,000 - less than 1% of the population. Yet, according to the interior minister, 5.6% of those arrested for murder are Romanian.
The government's move came amid mounting public alarm, growing media ferment and pressure, not just from Silvio Berlusconi's rightwing opposition, but also from within the governing majority. Foremost among those demanding action was Rome's mayor, Walter Veltroni, who last month became Mr Prodi's heir-apparent when he was chosen to lead a new united centre-left movement. Earlier this year Mr Veltroni flew to Romania to press the authorities to stem the flow of migrants, particularly Roma.
At a press conference on Wednesday widely credited with forcing the cabinet to act, he said: "Before Romania's entry into the EU Rome was the safest of cities." He added: "We need to start over with repatriations." Officials in Brussels said the Italian government appeared to be within the terms of a European directive that allows member states to expel citizens of other EU countries if they are a threat to public health, public security, or have insufficient means.
To the annoyance of the Italian right, the decree does not include the final provision. Franco Frattini, the commission vice-president for Justice, Freedom and Security, said last night: "The countries of the European Union must be lands of welcome, especially for citizens of other EU states. But we have to be tough on those who commit offences.
"Italy must not become a safe haven for criminals, a place where the rule of law is not respected."
Unlike Britain - where the liberals and leftists and the gutless media and useless Judges all conpsire to turn our country into a cage where the scum of Europe and the animals of the World come to live and that we pay for.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
